Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] 75 Summilux-M
From: Thomas Pastorello <tmp@mailbox.syr.edu>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 16:55:20 -0500 (EST)

On Thu, 26 Nov 1998, Nigel B Watson wrote:

> I've been hearing so much about this lens that I am seriously considering
> obtaining one.  I'd always considered it too long for a standard and too
> short for a tele, but now I'm looking from another perspective, which is
> that it might actually be the most economical way to have a super-fast M
> lens for occasional low-light work,  as opposed to both a 50/1.4 and 90/2
> (I currently own only 50/2 and 90/2.8).  I'm searching for a second-hand
> one in my travels, but until I find one to try out I'd appreciate some
> feedback from anyone who has used this lens extensively... just a few
> specific questions:
I'M GLAD TO GIVE YOU MY OPINION BASED ON YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH THE
75/1.4 IN MANY DIFFERENT SITUATIONS.  I HOPE OTHERS RESPOND TO HELP GIVE
YOU A BALANCED AND TOTAL PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE I MUST TELL YOU THAT I THINK
IF A PERFECT LENS WERE EVER CREATED, THE SUMMILUX 75 IS IT.

> 
> Performance wide-open vs. the current 90 Summicron (both lenses date from
> 1980)...does the 75 have the same low-contrast, slightly-soft rendition @
> "portrait" distances?
IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A SOFT PORTRAIT, CONTINUE TO USE THE 90/2.0. THE 75
IS CONTRASTY WIDE-OPEN.  HOWEVER, IF SOFTNESS IS NOT THE ISSUE, THE 75 CAN
PRODUCE A GREAT PORTRAIT EFFECT BY VIRTUE OF ITS EXCEPTIONALLY SMOOTH
TONAL GRADATIONS FOR SKIN TEXTURE AND COLOR. 


> Flare.  How does it handle point-sources such as ceiling floodlights in
> theatres?
THE 75 IS ABSOLUTELY FLARELESS.  PERFECT FLARE CONTROL. (UNLIKE THE 90/
2.0)  

> Focussing.  I'll be using mine on 0,72 viewfinder (which was the only
> type available with 75 framelines for 17 years, so Leica must have felt
> it was up to the task?) But has anyone who uses this lens on a 0,72 found
> it difficult to get sharp focus @ f/1.4 in the 1m-5m range?
I'VE GOTTEN PERFECTLY SHARP IMAGES AT F1.4 AT THE CLOSEST FOCUSING RANGE
ON A 0.72. 

> Handling.  What is the slowest handheld shutter speed you find
> practicable with this lens to obtain acceptibly sharp images?  Also, do
> you find that having the lower right 1/4 of the frame obsured by the
> lenshood presents an infuriating problem?
I'VE GOTTEN VERY SHARP IMAGES AT THE CLOSEST FOCUSING RANGE HAND HELD AT
1/30.  (I ALSO PRACTICE ALOT.)  I'VE NEVER NOTICED THE LOWER RIGHT
OBSCURING PROBLEM.  I'VE LEARNED TO COMPENSATE WITHOUT THINKING BY MOVING
THE CAMERA AROUND AND FINALLY SLIDING INTO THE FINAL FRAMING. 
A GREATER PROBLEM FOR ME HAS BEEN THE CLOSE-UP PARALAX CORRECTION.  THE
FRAMING IS TOO HIGH AND TOO RIGHT.  THIS IS NOT A 75 PROBLEM, HOWEVER,
IT'S AN M6 PROBLEM.  (EVERY MODEL OF THE M6 I'VE USED IS OFF.)
> Lastly,  Eric mentioned a savings of $1000 by buying second-hand.  The
> least price for a used version in Mint to Mint- condition which I've been
> able to obtain from any of the well-reputed dealers mentioned frequently
> on the LUG is US$1699 compared to a new German version at US$2295.  Even
> $600 is a lot of money if the 2 versions perform identically.   Is there
> *any* advantage (beside a 40g weight decrease) to the new version?  If
> not, does anyone know what's missing from the new one that cut the
> weight?
> 
> Thanks so much.
> Nigel
> 
I HOPE I'VE BEEN OF SOME HELP.   TOM P.
> ___________________________________________________________________
> You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
> Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
> or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>